Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > I can't imagine that the server is avoiding hash aggregation on a 1MB > > work_mem limit for data that's a few dozen of bytes. Is it really doing > > that? > > Yup: Aha. Thanks for testing. > Now that you mention it, this does seem a bit odd, although I remember > that there's a pretty substantial fudge factor in there when we have > no statistics (which we don't in this example). If I ANALYZE ctv_data > then it sticks to the hashagg plan all the way down to 64kB work_mem. Hmm, so we could solve the complaint by adding an ANALYZE. I'm open to that; other opinions? -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
